Google Cloud Pub/Sub vs. TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Grid

If you want to stream high volumes of data, be it for ETL streaming or event sourcing, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is your go-to tool. It's easy to learn, easy to observe its metrics and scales with ease without additional configuration so if you have more producers of consumers, all you need to do is to deploy on k8s your solutions so that you can perform autoscaling on your pods to adjust to the data volume. The DLQ is also very transparent and easy to configure. Your code will have no logic whatsoever regarding orchestrating pubsub, you just plug and play. However, if you are not in the Google Cloud Pub/Sub environment, you might have trouble or be most likely unable to use it since I think it's a product of Google Cloud.

It fits perfectly for SOA and EAI architecture with large numbers of services that required to be wired to each other, the binding virtualization is quite good to simply this part. For the simple scenario of orchestration and /or ESB architecture could be a better use traditional stack.

Incentivized

• With a pub/sub architecture the consumer is decoupled in time from the publisher i.e. if the consumer goes down, it can replay any events that occurred during its downtime.
• It also allows consumer to throttle and batch incoming data providing much needed flexibility while working with multiple types of data sources
• A simple and easy to use UI on cloud console for setup and debugging
• It enables event-driven architectures and asynchronous parallel processing, while improving performance, reliability and scalability

Incentivized

• reduce the number of http port required by services
• simplified the binding connection amongst services
• high scalability and fast deployment of applications

Incentivized

• Would be nice if the queue could be extended beyond 7 days.
• We found it a bit tricky replay unacknowledged messages when needed.

Incentivized

• health check of services and application features has been released with a lot of bugs that have never been fixed
• it is not so simple to apply the security policy to service/reference binding

Incentivized

It serves all of our purposes in the most transparent way I can imagine, after seeing other message queueing providers, I can only attest to its quality.

It has many libraries in many languages, google provides either good guides or they're AI generated code libraries that are easy to understand. It has very good observability too.

I have never faced a single problem in 4 years.

It's very fast, can be even better if you use protobuf.

They have decent documentation, but you need to pay for support. We weren't able to answer all our questions with the documentation and didn't have time to setup support before we needed it so I can't give it a higher rating but I think it tends to be a bit slow unless you're a GCP enterprise support customer.

Incentivized

Having used Amazon Web Services SNS & SQS I can say that even if the latter may offer more features, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is easier to use. On the other hand, usage of SNS & SQS as well as documentation and troubleshooting is easier with the AWS solution. Since we are not using GCP only for Pub/Sub the choice depends on other variables.

Incentivized

TIBCO service grid has been chosen as a natural selection of the TIBCO product evolution. The high flexibility and the binding virtualization fits very well with client needs for its EAI applications due to the huge number of services and applications, the management of application dependencies during deployment, the advantage of perfect integration with EMS for logging

Incentivized

You can just plug in consumers at will and it will respond, there's no need for further configuration or introducing new concepts. You have a queue, if it's slow, you plug in more consumers to process more messages: simple as that.

• Increased Efficiency with reliable and Google managed services up all the time wit Disaster Recovery in place as well
• Definitely Lower costs being a cloud based solution and easier to setup
• Faster Project delivery and go to market plan for the business use cases basis this technology at the back end

Incentivized

• The integration of old BW with BWSE and its interface quite similar to design time has reduced the cost of training for developers
• The TIBCO support for this product is no the best and clients complains too much about this. This required to find a workaround or force the client to move to new/or different product. Huge impact on ROI

Incentivized